VIA Rail

[nfitz]

Why is that so difficult to believe? What kind of carrot do you want VIA to throw at CN which could possibly compell that massive corporation with a market capitalization of $100 billion to accept relinquishing full control over its own assets?

I'm asking an engineering question. Not a financial question.

CP doesn’t really have much of double-tracks left anywhere on their network and apparently doesn’t plan to restore them even in the long-term. Why should they cling to the entirety of its ROW, if there non-competing railroads who are willing to pay to to build their own tracks next to theirs?

What makes CP different from CN?

What stops CP turning around in 30 years and using the "VIA" tracks to run freight?

 

[Urban Sky]

In fairness to Nfitz, I think he's clearly indicated that he sees a roll for legislated priority; Amtrak has this in the U.S. a country where pols and many bureaucrats are beset by brutal lobbying from those w/funds and interests.

So it hardly seems outlandish that Ottawa might find the........ahem........courage to legislate on this file and even the threat of same, if taken seriously should open the route of a negotiated settlement.

***

Additionally, depending on what you imagine you're trying to accomplish with this, the argument could be made that the Federal gov't has now put 12B on the table to achieve VIA's service objectives in the corridor, albeit likely through a partner.......

If a small portion of that were hived off to achieve the service objectives that are desired along the existing corridor route....there's a fairly rich carrot.

We can discuss all we want how much it would be in the mutual interest of CN and the federal government to create a passenger-centric corridor within the ROW of the Kingston Sub. However, I have yet to see even the slightest hint that either party has any kind of interest whatsoever to consider such suggestions…

Both CN and CP maintain surplus corridor space that has no forseeable economic return for the next generation.

Depending on the strategies of the day, one or the other may show greater openness to monetizing that space if the right offer comes along. Its worth saying, CN sold off large chunks corridor to Mx and some to VIA as well not sooo long ago.

Of course, there were generally complete sell-offs, rather than partial; but still, I do think its fair to ask if there may be a path to seeing more of that openness for a price that would be worthwhile to the Canadian Federal, or Ontario Provincial gov'ts , if not VIA itself.

CN has been very consistent in its behavior as to selling peripheric ROWs (while retaining running rights for as long as they operate over them) and being extremely protective over its transcontinental core network. It’s abundantly clear into which category CN’s Kingston Sub (East of Pickering) falls…

 

[crs1026]

^None of us know what kind of language was inserted in VIA's service contract about the triple track..... but I suspect there was no specific onus placed on CN other than its agreement to allow more frequent passenger trains - which by itself was not an unfair trade imho.

In practice CN uses all three tracks very flexibly, and this very much works to VIA's advantage. If one were to reopen the project and propose adding additional third track (remember, the original VIA plan contemplated much more track construction, but the money ran out), I can see an opportunity to negotiate further and perhaps place more meaningful performance standards on CN. But any sort of "this is mine, that is yours" mentality without planning a full ViA dedicated infrastructure would benefit CN much more than VIA.

I am a lot more sympathetic to the idea of twinning the trackage so VIA has its own trackage for regional service - and perhaps Ottawa could override CN's aversion to that, or more easily justify encroaching on CN's property line in some sort of soft expropriation that shaves off a few feet while leaving CN's existing 2 tracks untouched. In that scenario, CN might not want to retain the third track segments, as with VIA gone they don't need them.. But it will be a long while before anyone can find the money for that regional service investment.

To say again, the real thing to fear once HxR moves VIA's through business to Peterborough is that CN will no longer fear reducing speed limits on the Kingston line, and possibly even consider removing segments of double track (as CP has done east of Smiths Falls, and as CN has already west of Toronto). CN does not need full double track between Toronto and Montreal to run its own trains, absent VIA - the entire transcon handles similar tonnage as a single track line. If Ottawa snoozes, the local trains could be harder to run..

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Considering that CN's mainline is approximately 6,000 kilometers long, with several dozen major cities on it, it stands to reason that the traffic patterns on some sections of the line would be busier than on others, and thus they tailor the capacity to match.

Perhaps I wasn't clear, but I was referring to service from here to Montreal - which is the only section I recall having discussions previously about the third track.

Where outside the corridor does CN have 3 mainline tracks? I'd have thought even two would be less common.

 

[micheal_can]

Maybe as part of the HFR plan, any section of the Windsor - Quebec City corridor that isn't double track should get double track. I know the Guelph Sub is single track. I don't know if that is why Via does not add more service. For the Kingston Sub, adding a 3rd or 4th rail could also be a good thing.

 

[EnviroTO]

The whole reason that HFR is going to use the northern route and dedicated tracks is:

1. it is not a great investment to sink money into assets that you will not own... tracks built in a CN corridor are owned by CN
2. they tried putting in tracks to alleviate choke points and found that their trains would be put onto those tracks and forced to wait longer because all scheduling in the corridor is based on CNs prioritization. What was meant to allow VIA to get around CN was turned into something that allowed CN to get around VIA.

 

[micheal_can]

The whole reason that HFR is going to use the northern route and dedicated tracks is:

1. it is not a great investment to sink money into assets that you will not own... tracks built in a CN corridor are owned by CN
2. they tried putting in tracks to alleviate choke points and found that their trains would be put onto those tracks and forced to wait longer because all scheduling in the corridor is based on CNs prioritization. What was meant to allow VIA to get around CN was turned into something that allowed CN to get around VIA.

On that second point, all I can think is.. there ought to be a law....

 

[lenaitch]

Both CN and CP maintain surplus corridor space that has no forseeable economic return for the next generation.

Really? I thought both were pretty relentless in abandoning trackage once they no longer saw a use for it.

What stops CP turning around in 30 years and using the "VIA" tracks to run freight?

Ownership?

 

[Northern Light]

Really? I thought both were pretty relentless in abandoning trackage once they no longer saw a use for it.

I wasn't meaning corridors themselves, but space in their corridors. Lots of corridors are set up for double-track, some for more, but haven't had that space fully utilized in a generation, or two, or three.

Think of the central section of the CP mainline in midtown Toronto, it was at peak a 4-5 track corridor, but today is almost entirely limited to 2 tracks.

 

[lenaitch]

I wasn't meaning corridors themselves, but space in their corridors. Lots of corridors are set up for double-track, some for more, but haven't had that space fully utilized in a generation, or two, or three.

Think of the central section of the CP mainline in midtown Toronto, it was at peak a 4-5 track corridor, but today is almost entirely limited to 2 tracks.

Gotcha.

I'm wondering how much rules regarding such things as track-to-track clearances, set-back from ROW, etc. have changed over the years that might now impact that.

 

[turbanplanner]

Gotcha.

I'm wondering how much rules regarding such things as track-to-track clearances, set-back from ROW, etc. have changed over the years that might now impact that.

I went to rouge park and it was crazy seeing trains run every 5 mins on one single stretch of track!

 

[reaperexpress]

Brightline's Florida project is quite similar to VIA's vision of HFR: hourly service mostly on existing upgraded ROW with a bit of 200 km/h running along a new ROW.

Since service from Orlando to Miami began this week, I decided to update my chart comparing the average speeds of intercity trains in Canada and the U.S.

Speed/Stops measurement is for the fastest trip on the line.
Frequency is the total for all services along the line

Here's Brightline's current timetable, showing the average speed of each trip:

They could have actually achieved a higher average speed if their express trains skipped more than just Boca Raton. As they increase service, they could add some all-stops short turn services between Miami and West Palm Beach during peak periods, which would allow the trains to Orlando to run non-stop through that segment:

Extract of reaperexpress fantasy Brightline timetable

 

[smallspy]

Perhaps I wasn't clear, but I was referring to service from here to Montreal - which is the only section I recall having discussions previously about the third track.

There is very, very little single-track on the mainline between Toronto and Montreal. The eastern 12 miles of the York Sub is all that is left.

And that is a very well known bottleneck in CN's operations which they take very great pains to deal with - to the point of (attempting to) schedule trains in such a manner as to prevent them from getting clogged up there. They would probably love to have 2 tracks through there in an ideal world.

Where outside the corridor does CN have 3 mainline tracks? I'd have thought even two would be less common.

Sections of 3 mainline tracks exist elsewhere on their network, but generally in far lesser quantities than on the Kingston Sub. They come in handy in places such as around yard entrances/exits, where it may be required to stage trains out of the way of others.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

There is very, very little single-track on the mainline between Toronto and Montreal. The eastern 12 miles of the York Sub is all that is left.

And that is a very well known bottleneck in CN's operations which they take very great pains to deal with - to the point of (attempting to) schedule trains in such a manner as to prevent them from getting clogged up there. They would probably love to have 2 tracks through there in an ideal world.

Dan

Silly question.

I see they have (badly decayed) second track still in place for a good distance around Zoo Road in Rouge Park, if that area is a bottleneck, why is the second track in dis-use/storage track condition?. (I'm not questioning your statement, I'm curious about CN's thinking)

I see most of that section (12 miles York Sub) either had a second track at one point or is set up for it (bridges that allow for two tracks)

 

[Urban Sky]

Silly question.

I see they have (badly decayed) second track still in place for a good distance around Zoo Road in Rouge Park, if that area is a bottleneck, why is the second track in dis-use/storage track condition?. (I'm not questioning your statement, I'm curious about CN's thinking)

I see most of that section (12 miles York Sub) either had a second track at one point or is set up for it (bridges that allow for two tracks)

I assume that the point made by @smallspy was that capacity is constrained enough to not rip out any second or third tracks the second we have HFR along the Havelock Sub (as @crs1026 keeps insisting for whatever reason), but doesn’t cause enough pain to justify (yet) the expense of restoring a second track along the Eastern half of the York Sub. CN’s focus would therefore be to maintain the current capacity along its Toronto-Montreal main corridor and to mitigate the impact of the single-track section between Doncaster and Pickering…